Fabric cleaning formulations have been previously developed and employed in the cleaning of textile fabrics, including upholstery, leather and pile, fabrics of the type normally found in carpets and rugs. Many of the prior fabric cleaning formulations involve the use of detergent materials in aqueous or solvent mediums, in which dirt and soil are removed by normal detergent action. Others involve formulations which are applied dry or damp to the fabric surface. Soil and dirt particles are, in effect, loosened by mild detergent action. Loosened particles are then adsorbed on particles of filler material and thereafter vacuumed from the fabric.
A disadvantage to many of the previous cleaning formulations is the tendency of the shampooed area to resoil or restain soon after cleaning. In many instances, residue from fabric cleaning formulations of the prior art seem to attract soil and stains to the cleaned textile fabric.
Others have tried to solve this resoiling problem by modifying fabric cleaning compositions with additives to prevent resoiling such as various types of fluorochemicals. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,043,964 (Sherman et al.); 4,279,796 (Tarkinson); 5,338,475 (Corey et al.); 5,395,555 (Colurcciello et al.). Still others have modified fabric cleaning compositions with stain resist agents, such as styrene maleic anhydride, methyl/methacrylate, methacrylic acid and the like. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,716,488 (Kolsky et al.); 3,722,323 (Morgan et al.); 3,779,929 (abler et al.); 3,835,071 (Allen et al.); 4,203,859 (Kirn et al.); 4,566,980 (Smith); 4,678,595 (Malik et al.); 4,908,149 (Moore et al.).
Still others have modified fabric cleaning compositions with inorganic particles such as clays, silicas and alumina to improve resoiling. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,716,488 (Kolsky et al.); 3,736,259 (Buck et al.); 4,035,148 (Metzger et al.); 4,090,974 (Morganson); 4,566,980 (Smith); 4,581,385 (Smith); 4,873,000 (Weller). While all of these modifications improve resoiling or restaining vs. the unmodified fabric cleaning formulation, there is still some degree of resoiling or restaining.
Others have tried to solve this problem by combining soil resist agents and stain resist agents in a single fabric cleaning formulation. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,901,727 (Loudas); 4,043,923 (Loudas); 5,073,442 (Knowlton et al.); 5,212,272 (Sargent et al.); 5,439,610 (Ryan et al.); and Japanese Kokai 56-129281. Resoiling and restaining are further improved, but there is still room for improvement. Furthermore, it would be advantageous if once textile fabrics were cleaned that they resisted resoiling and restaining better than they had resisted soiling or staining prior to cleaning.
Certain of the prior art, particularly U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,043,923 (Loudas) and 5,439,610 (Ryan et al.), attempt to achieve a stable product formulation among incompatible components (such as fluorochemical emulsions and inorganics) through the use of organic solvents. However, the presence of organic solvents is believed deleterious since these materials are flammable, have the potential to irritate the skin of cleaning personnel, and detract from air quality when used indoors.
Accordingly, it is an object of this invention to provide an improved textile fabric cleaning composition which imparts to the fabric improved soil and stain-resistance after cleaning. In addition, it is believed advantageous to provide a cleaning composition which is substantially free of organic solvents.